SpaceX Starship and Blue Origin New Glenn thread 🚀

[RoryN]

Both of these mega-rocket programs are now intimately tied to the new administration, even more so than NASA. So, this is a dedicated thread.

I personally find Musk and Bezos to both be asshats, but the success of this particular technology can't be denied, and it's created by people other than them. However, if you must spin your "everything those two touch is inherently evil" and "why spend for space" wheels in here, that's fine; it'll bump the thread. People did an excellent job fucking up our planet and society in 2024 with their deeds and votes, so I'm choosing to concentrate on excursions beyond Earth in this topic. (Placed in italics for easy referencing later as needed.)

There will be an unprecedented ramp-up of flights of these two game-changing vehicles in 2025.

New Glenn's inaugural flight took off last night and, while they didn't land the first stage, they got their payload to orbit - which is absolutely remarkable for a first try and decades of preparation.

Next flight is Starship, currently scheduled to launch in a few hours from now. This is a newly-redesigned version, and the objective will be for it to launch its very first payload, in addition to attempting to catch the first stage back at the launch pad again:

 

[Politruk]

"Starship" is no name for a ship that will never leave the Solar System.

 

[RoryN]

"Starship" is no name for a ship that will never leave the Solar System.

It doesn't make sense as a band name, either.

Yet, here we are.

 

[jomar]

Speaking of which, I just heard “We Built This City” toned down and a few word changes from “rock and roll” in some lame commercial

 

[Politruk]

Speaking of which, I just heard “We Built This City” toned down and a few word changes from “rock and roll” in some lame commercial

This city?

 

[jomar]

This city?

No but it would be kind of cool to live in a city named Starbase

 

[Politruk]

Elon Musk is not an alien from South Africa.

Elon Musk is an alien from Mars.

He just wants to go home.

 

[RoryN]

Starship update: good launch, good booster return, good booster catch back at the launch pad. Looks like they made progress on the landing re: condition of the booster.

New Starship then headed towards orbit...but blew up. Looked like a possible problem with the methane fuel.

 

[Lazaran]

I’ll bring class, race, and politics into the issue. (And a little conspiracy theory fun.)

So who are these grand projects really for???



They all contribute to the degradation of the planet with minimal tangible return for the common person - especially people of color who make up the vast majority of marginalized groups and developing nations.



Also (conspiracy theory time):

What if there is a plan by the ultra-wealthy / “Illuminati” to achieve an extra-Terran survival capability, only to have those ultra-wealthy / Illuminati go extra-Terran en masse and then release a man-made super-plague upon the earth to depopulate it - returning only after the plague has run its course (done its work) -say, four or five years. (The advance in AI and automation have made vast numbers of humans redundant, and that vast number of humans is now a liability after centuries of being an asset.)

The ultra-wealthy / Illuminati would likely not want to be around while the nasty business (mass human depopulation / decomposition) was unfolding, and even the most secure bunkers could be breached or buried, but The Moon, Mars, etc, are completely out of range / unassailable: Especially Mars, which is President Musk’s passion project.

Bottom line:

The colonization of The Moon, Mars, etc, is largely counter-beneficial for the common person - and it provides an opportunity for wealthy psychopaths / sociopaths and their tech armies to achieve a technocratic genocidal coup of unimaginable proportions.

 

[Politruk]

Starship update: good launch, good booster return, good booster catch back at the launch pad. Looks like they made progress on the landing re: condition of the booster.

New Starship then headed towards orbit...but blew up. Looked like a possible problem with the methane fuel.

Well, at least it was unmanned -- right?

 

[Politruk]

I’ll bring class, race, and politics into the issue. (And a little conspiracy theory fun.)

So who are these grand projects really for???



They all contribute to the degradation of the planet with minimal tangible return for the common person - especially people of color who make up the vast majority of marginalized groups and developing nations.



Also (conspiracy theory time):

What if there is a plan by the ultra-wealthy / “Illuminati” to achieve an extra-Terran survival capability, only to have those ultra-wealthy / Illuminati go extra-Terran en masse and then release a man-made super-plague upon the earth to depopulate it - returning only after the plague has run its course (done its work) -say, four or five years. (The advance in AI and automation have made vast numbers of humans redundant, and that vast number of humans is now a liability after centuries of being an asset.)

The ultra-wealthy / Illuminati would likely not want to be around while the nasty business (mass human depopulation / decomposition) was unfolding, and even the most secure bunkers could be breached or buried, but The Moon, Mars, etc, are completely out of range / unassailable: Especially Mars, which is President Musk’s passion project.

Bottom line:

The colonization of The Moon, Mars, etc, is largely counter-beneficial for the common person - and it provides an opportunity for wealthy psychopaths / sociopaths and their tech armies to achieve a technocratic genocidal coup of unimaginable proportions.

Come to think of it, what you describe would really be the best thing for the Earth -- and the best hope of long-term survival for humanity.

 

[RoryN]

So who are these grand projects really for???

Mankind.

It's human nature to conquer new frontiers as means of survival. That won't change.

And we can see, in no uncertain terms, what happens to us as a society when there are none left on Earth. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well, at least it was unmanned -- right?

Unmanned, and a test article.

 

[jomar]

I’ll bring class, race, and politics into the issue. (And a little conspiracy theory fun.)

So who are these grand projects really for???



They all contribute to the degradation of the planet with minimal tangible return for the common person - especially people of color who make up the vast majority of marginalized groups and developing nations.



Also (conspiracy theory time):

What if there is a plan by the ultra-wealthy / “Illuminati” to achieve an extra-Terran survival capability, only to have those ultra-wealthy / Illuminati go extra-Terran en masse and then release a man-made super-plague upon the earth to depopulate it - returning only after the plague has run its course (done its work) -say, four or five years. (The advance in AI and automation have made vast numbers of humans redundant, and that vast number of humans is now a liability after centuries of being an asset.)

The ultra-wealthy / Illuminati would likely not want to be around while the nasty business (mass human depopulation / decomposition) was unfolding, and even the most secure bunkers could be breached or buried, but The Moon, Mars, etc, are completely out of range / unassailable: Especially Mars, which is President Musk’s passion project.

Bottom line:

The colonization of The Moon, Mars, etc, is largely counter-beneficial for the common person - and it provides an opportunity for wealthy psychopaths / sociopaths and their tech armies to achieve a technocratic genocidal coup of unimaginable proportions.

The truth is revealed at 2:27

 

[ishtat]

"Starship" is no name for a ship that will never leave the Solar System.

Makes as much sense as naming a landing on the moon after the god of the Sun!

It takes the attention of Bezos and Musk away from earth and politics for a while.

It's also worth remembering that when Apollo 11 succeeded, the USA was the subject of unanimous international admiration for the last time.

 

[Politruk]

Makes as much sense as naming a landing on the moon after the god of the Sun!

NASA's new lunar program is more sensibly named "Artemis."

But I guess they couldn't do that in the '60s -- not macho enough.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Mankind.

It's human nature to conquer new frontiers as means of survival. That won't change.

And we can see, in no uncertain terms, what happens to us as a society when there are none left on Earth. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



Unmanned, and a test article.

Earlier eras of exploration have been driven by immediate opportunities -- for new resources, for new trade routes, or for new people to enslave.

Exploration has never been done just for the sake of conquering new frontiers. When people are desperate to survive, they don't risk scarce resources on exploring.

Even the expensive space race of the 1960's only happened because of the U.S. and U.S.S.R were striving to build new weapon technologies to use here on earth.

There is no benefit to vanity projects like Starship. It's just a toy for a spoiled child.

 

[Lazaran]

Earlier eras of exploration have been driven by immediate opportunities -- for new resources, for new trade routes, or for new people to enslave.

Exploration has never been done just for the sake of conquering new frontiers. When people are desperate to survive, they don't risk scarce resources on exploring.

Even the expensive space race of the 1960's only happened because of the U.S. and U.S.S.R were striving to build new weapon technologies to use here on earth.

There is no benefit to vanity projects like Starship. It's just a toy for a spoiled child.

Yeah “Starship” isn’t “it” (technologically) when it comes to a legitimate capability for human exploration/ exploitation of extra-Terran opportunities / resources.

It appears on the surface to be the SpaceX version of the Titan submersible.

I predict “Starship” will fail in an even more spectacular fashion than the Titan submersible.

 

[RoryN]

There is no benefit to vanity projects like Starship.

Aside from exploration, Starship has the ability to get resources from point a to point b here on Earth in hours rather than days, at a fraction of the cost of current methods. That's why the U.S. Army has already invested a great many millions in it.

But "resources" doesn't have to mean food and weapons related to military. Resources could mean any number of things. How could certain resources, distributed faster, help people?

This project doesn't fit cleanly into the boxes detractors want it to.

I predict “Starship” will fail in an even more spectacular fashion than the Titan submersible.

The two aren't remotely comparable.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Aside from exploration, Starship has the ability to get resources from point a to point b here on Earth in hours rather than days, at a fraction of the cost of current methods. That's why the U.S. Army has already invested a great many millions in it.

How does Starship compare in terms of capacity/cost/speed to proven technologies like a C-130 cargo plane?

Elon Musk is a huckster who likes to spin outlandish tales about the hypothetical capacities of his transportation technologies. When they're actually built (like the loop under the Vegas convention center) they fall far short of his projections.

It sounds like Musk has found a clever way to get the Army to foot the bill for his adolescent fantasies.

 

[RoryN]

How does Starship compare in terms of capacity/cost/speed to proven technologies like a C-130 cargo plane?

The C-130 lineage didn't start as a "proven technology". It was tested, just as Starship is being tested.

C-130 max speed: 367 mph
Starship suborbital (non-space-travel) speed: 15k mph

C-130 max payload: 44,500 pounds
Starship max payload: 330,000+ pounds

Cost: variables abound. Can be debated, but speed and capacity are factors.

 

[Lazaran]

Aside from exploration, Starship has the ability to get resources from point a to point b here on Earth in hours rather than days, at a fraction of the cost of current methods. That's why the U.S. Army has already invested a great many millions in it.

But "resources" doesn't have to mean food and weapons related to military. Resources could mean any number of things. How could certain resources, distributed faster, help people?

This project doesn't fit cleanly into the boxes detractors want it to.



The two aren't remotely comparable.

The ultimate expression of “Starship” is almost exactly like “Titan”:

Take a large (relative) number of untrained passengers; aboard a novel craft; into the most inhospitable environment; to a fantastic destination.

When that ^ happens, “Starship” will be in the same exact situation as “Titan” - and the same results are inevitable, imho.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

The C-130 lineage didn't start as a "proven technology". It was tested, just as Starship is being tested.

C-130 max speed: 367 mph
Starship suborbital (non-space-travel) speed: 15k mph

C-130 max payload: 44,500 pounds
Starship max payload: 330,000+ pounds

Cost: variables abound. Can be debated, but speed and capacity are factors.

Why is it called "Starship" when the only practical use for it is shipping tons of cargo really fast? Which there's no demand for, I'll point out ... .

This is a classic tech-bro technique: Invent use cases for a sexy new tech which don't match up to what the market wants or needs. We're seeing this game play out right now with the AI bubble. All the AI boosters are scrambling to find some use for AI to justify the billions spent on research and the damage it does to the planet.

 

[RoryN]

The ultimate expression of “Starship” is almost exactly like “Titan”:

Take a large (relative) number of untrained passengers; aboard a novel craft; into the most inhospitable environment; to a fantastic destination.

The Titan was never designed to take a large # of passengers. And had no practical use beyond tourism.

Why is it called "Starship" when the only practical use for it is shipping tons of cargo really fast? Which there's no demand for, I'll point out ...

Shipping "tons of cargo really fast" has been in demand since the inception of both shipping and cargo.

 

[Lazaran]

The Titan was never designed to take a large # of passengers. And had no practical use beyond tourism.

Um, yeah, it did.

5 occupants is a large (relative) number of occupants for a deep sea vehicle.

Two or three total occupants is typical in traditional builds.

The entire reason Titan was built out of Carbon Fiber was because building a comparable traditional DSV out of traditional materials (titanium) that was capable of accommodating 5 occupants in the Titan’s configuration would have been exorbitantly expensive (and large & heavy).

 

[RoryN]

Um, yeah, it did.

5 occupants is a large (relative) number of occupants for a deep sea vehicle.

But you're trying to compare it to a vessel which can hold around 100 people.